[Seaside] So where is the "release" version of 3.7?

[Boris Popov]

Count me in; I think it would work great.

Cheers!

-Boris

-- 
+1.604.689.0322
DeepCove Labs Ltd.
4th floor 595 Howe Street
Vancouver, Canada V6C 2T5
http://tinyurl.com/r7uw4

boris at deepcovelabs.com

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE

This email is intended only for the persons named in the message
header. Unless otherwise indicated, it contains information that is
private and confidential. If you have received it in error, please
notify the sender and delete the entire message including any
attachments.

Thank you.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: seaside-bounces at lists.squeakfoundation.org [mailto:seaside-
> bounces at lists.squeakfoundation.org] On Behalf Of Martial Boniou
> Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2007 5:49 AM
> To: The Squeak Enterprise Aubergines Server - general discussion.
> Subject: Re: [Seaside] So where is the "release" version of 3.7?
> 
> Just a suggestion. Why don't we use a versioning system a la
> linux-kernel? This system has a even/odd mark. For example, 2.7 should
> be instable/dev and so 2.8 could be tested/stable. So the developer will
> save to MC for 2.7/2.9/2.11 etc... and user only upgrade/merge the
> 2.8/2.10/3.0 version. Thus Lukas et al. continue his work without
> thinking about testing and validating and a group of developer (or Lukas
> when he's sure) post a package to the stable repository when it is
> tested and stable. Then there won't be any 2.8 ancestors in 2.7 but
> simply 2.7 to 2.7 because 2.8 (and even numbers'group) works as a drop
> box.
> 
> I hope I am clear. But it could be a good solution (awaiting MC3 with
> RCS) and not a break for developers. I think it's not too bad as it is.
> Of course there is bug and broken issues but this is little glitch we
> should tolerate.
> 
> Tell me what you think about that. Actually 2.8 can be 2.7-stable but
> the only rule is no code upgrade in the stable packages...
> 
> --
> Martial
> 
> 
> stephane ducasse a écrit :
> | I would really to see an official announcement for 2.7 (when it will
> | be finished) so that we can market it well.
> |
> | Stef
> |
> | On 26 févr. 07, at 18:46, Todd Blanchard wrote:
> |
> | >I can't say it makes me feel all fuzzy about 2.7 when it is still
> | >marked alpha and people seem to have dropped it in favor of
> | >beginning 2.8.  The latest thing I can see in the repository is
> | >Seaside 2.7a1-mb.205
> | >
> | >It would be nice to see something labeled 2.7 final.
> | >
> | >-Todd Blanchard
> | >
> | >
> | >_______________________________________________
> | >Seaside mailing list
> | >Seaside at lists.squeakfoundation.org
> | >http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/seaside
> | >
> |
> | _______________________________________________
> | Seaside mailing list
> | Seaside at lists.squeakfoundation.org
> | http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/seaside
> |
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Seaside mailing list
> Seaside at lists.squeakfoundation.org
> http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/seaside